https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89492 HC held that the AO's assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue's interests under Section 263. The court found no evidence that the AO examined the depreciation claim on leasehold improvements during assessment proceedings. The CIT (Appeals) and Tribunal's concurrent findings were justified, as the AO failed to conduct proper inquiry or address the 100% depreciation claim for the assessment year. The order was consequently decided against the assessee, affirming procedural deficiencies in the original assessment. en-us Tue, 17 Jun 2025 07:57:57 +0530 Tue, 17 Jun 2025 07:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89492 HC held that the AO's assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue's interests under Section 263. The court found no evidence that the AO examined the depreciation claim on leasehold improvements during assessment proceedings. The CIT (Appeals) and Tribunal's concurrent findings were justified, as the AO failed to conduct proper inquiry or address the 100% depreciation claim for the assessment year. The order was consequently decided against the assessee, affirming procedural deficiencies in the original assessment. Highlights Income Tax Tue, 17 Jun 2025 07:57:57 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89492